London Banter - View Single Post

Paul Corfield · June 10th 07, 02:46 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:35:13 GMT, (Neil
Williams) wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:55:48 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote:

It would be unenforceable and potentially dangerous at those places
where there is open, cross platform interchange between NR and LU. These
locations are impossible to gate - hence why there aren't any - and it
is not practical to install huge quantities of validators in order to
make validation "convenient".

Isn't it? The equipment is not that costly. The Netherlands is
starting to install two such boxes at every set of doors on every bus
and tram.

There are far too many physical constraints and passenger volumes are
much higher than the Netherlands. I cannot foresee a day where the
platforms between the Central Line and "one" at Stratford, as just one
example, could either be gated on the interchange or even have enough
validators on poles or fixed to walls to cope with the rapid and high
volume interchange that occurs there. There are plenty of other
locations where you run into the same issue. I know - I spent enough
time in the planning stage of Prestige examining these issues.

The Netherlands may well be installing such equipment but it remains to
be seen if they can make the system work. Is the equipment solely for
validation on entry or is it for also for exit? If exit then I fear
they will have a huge problem on their hands. Exit validation works in
Singapore but let's just say their regime and sense of societal
compliance is a tad different from the UK or Netherlands. I love the
Netherlands as a place and admire much about their transport system but
their fraud control policies left a lot to be desired last time I was
there (a pretty long time ago I will concede). The only strategy to
control matters on the trams was to reinstall conductors and have
boarding at the rear. From memory evasion levels were well into double
figures and folklore said the trams were "free" - a refrain we now hear
about TfL's bendy buses. Now it is possible that things have moved on a
long way but I somehow doubt it. The Dutch national smartcard scheme is
a nice idea but there are some formidable issues to deal with in getting
it work in a way that the Dutch will consider to be fair when set
against the Strippenkaart system. I know you are much more up to date
with all of this than me so perhaps you can give an update on how well
it is going?

What would be the consequence to
Travelcard holders if they did not validate?

For consistency, I imagine it would have to be a gbp5 "penalty" as it
is for PAYG.

While every (non pass or permit encoded) Oyster card as PAYG
functionality within it not everyone opts to load cash to it. If you
regularly travel beyond your zones then you may find it convenient to
hold a cash balance. If you are a commuter who makes a set journey every
day on a valid Travelcard and does not stray from that then why should
you be forced to give TfL cash or have to reload your card with value
because it's gone negative just because there is not an entry or exit
validation? I don't see the benefit to TfL outweighing the
stakeholder / press / public downside - something TfL is very aware of
simply because of the accountability to the Mayor. It would also
provide a powerful disincentive for current NR magnetic ticket holders
to switch to Oyster when they can happily use such a ticket without such
a penalty being levied. There is enough complaint about Oyster being
useless for NR ticket holders already - why make it worse?

I cannot see a form of
"penalty" being accepted by holders of Travelcards given how long the
product has been in place. Apart from some possible revenue loss on the
basis you postulate what does TfL lose apart from some card and usage
data?

Consistency and understandability, not to mention saving money by not
having to deploy (as many) RPIs at the outer ends of the network.

These are not benefits that the travelling public would particularly
notice or understand. IMO it would not take too much of a "campaign"
from people who felt suitably aggrieved or inconvenienced to make such a
policy unravel. I genuinely think it would be very hard for TfL for
defend it unless there was some demonstrable benefit for passengers. The
only one that there is relates to auto extension beyond Travelcard
validity using PAYG and that's easy to sell, convenient for passengers
and a genuine bonus for them from using smartcard technology.

--
Paul C

Admits to working for London Underground!